A Stratified Approach for Managing Patients With Low Back Pain in Primary Care (SPLIT Program): A Before-and-After Study.

PURPOSE: To determine the effects of stratified primary care for low back pain (SPLIT program) in decreasing back-related disability for patients with low back pain (LBP) in primary care. METHODS: We conducted a before-and-after study. We compared health-related outcomes for 2 sequential, independent cohorts of patients with LBP recruited at 7 primary care units in Portugal. The first prospective cohort study characterized usual care (UC) and collected data from February to September 2018. The second was performed when the SPLIT program was implemented and collected data from November 2018 to October 2021. Between cohorts, physical therapists were trained in the implementation of the SPLIT program, which used the STarT Back Screening Tool to categorize patients for matched treatment. We compared back-related disability (Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire, 0-24 points), pain (Numeric Pain Rating Scale, 0-10 points), perceived effect of treatment (Global Perceived Effect Scale, -5 to +5 points), and health-related quality of life (EuroQoL 5 dimensions 3 levels index, 0-1 points). RESULTS: We enrolled a total of 447 patients: 115 in the UC cohort (mostly treated with pharmacologic treatment) and 332 in the SPLIT cohort (all referred for a physical therapy intervention program). Over the study period of 6 months, patients in the SPLIT program showed significantly greater improvements in back-related disability (ß, -2.94; 95% CI, -3.63 to -2.24; P ≤ .001), pain (ß, -0.88; 95% CI, -1.18 to -0.57; P ≤ .001), perceived effect of treatment (ß, 1.40; 95% CI, 0.97 to 1.82; P ≤ .001), and health-related quality of life (ß, 0.11; 95% CI, 0.08 to 0.14; P ≤ .001) compared with UC. CONCLUSIONS: Patients in the SPLIT program for LBP showed greater benefits regarding health-related outcomes than those receiving UC.

MyBack - effectiveness and implementation of a behavior change informed exercise programme to prevent low back pain recurrences: a hybrid effectiveness-implementation randomized controlled study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Low back pain (LBP) is a common health condition and the leading cause of years lived with disability worldwide. Most LBP episodes have a favourable prognosis, but recurrences within a year are common. Despite the individual and societal impact related to LBP recurrences, there is limited evidence on effective strategies for secondary prevention of LBP and successful implementation of intervention programmes in a real-world context. The aim of this study is to analyse the effectiveness of a tailored exercise and behavioural change programme (MyBack programme) in the secondary prevention of LBP; and evaluate acceptability, feasibility and determinants of implementation by the different stakeholders, as well as the implementation strategy of the MyBack programme in real context. METHODS: This protocol describes a hybrid type I, randomized controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness and implementation of MyBack programme in the context of primary health care. The Behaviour Change Wheel framework and FITT-VP principles will inform the development of the behaviour change and exercise component of MyBack programme, respectively. Patients who have recently recovered from an episode of non-specific LBP will be randomly assigned to MyBack and usual care group or usual care group. The primary outcome will be the risk of LBP recurrence. The secondary outcomes will include disability, pain intensity, musculoskeletal health, and health-related quality of life. Participants will be followed monthly for 1 year. Costs data related to health care use and the MyBack programme will be also collected. Implementation outcomes will be assessed in parallel with the effectiveness study using qualitative methods (focus groups with participants and health providers) and quantitative data (study enrolment and participation data; participants adherence). DISCUSSION: To our knowledge, this is the first study assessing the effectiveness and implementation of a tailored exercise and behaviour change programme for prevention of LBP recurrences. Despite challenges related to hybrid design, it is expected that data on the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, and implementation of the MyBack programme may contribute to improve health care in patients at risk of LBP recurrences, contributing to direct and indirect costs reduction for patients and the health system. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05841732.

Aquatic exercise and pain neurophysiology education versus aquatic exercise alone for patients with chronic low back pain: a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of a combination of aquatic exercise and pain neurophysiology education with aquatic exercise alone in chronic low back pain patients. DESIGN: Single-blind randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Outpatient clinic. SUBJECTS: Sixty-two chronic low back pain patients were randomly allocated to receive aquatic exercise and pain neurophysiology education (n = 30) or aquatic exercise alone (n = 32). INTERVENTIONS: Twelve sessions of a 6-week aquatic exercise programme preceded by 2 sessions of pain neurophysiology education. Controls received only 12 sessions of the 6-week aquatic exercise programme. MAIN MEASURES: The primary outcomes were pain intensity (Visual Analogue Scale) and functional disability (Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale) at the baseline, 6 weeks after the beginning of the aquatic exercise programme and at the 3 months follow-up. Secondary outcome was kinesiophobia (Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia). RESULTS: Fifty-five participants completed the study. Analysis using mixed-model ANOVA revealed a significant treatment condition interaction on pain intensity at the 3 months follow-up, favoring the education group (mean SD change: -25.4± 26.7 vs -6.6 ± 30.7, P < 0.005). Although participants in the education group were more likely to report perceived functional benefits from treatment at 3 months follow-up (RR=1.63, 95%CI: 1.01-2.63), no significant differences were found in functional disability and kinesiophobia between groups at any time. CONCLUSIONS: This study's findings support the provision of pain neurophysiology education as a clinically effective addition to aquatic exercise.

Exploring barriers and facilitators to the adoption of regular exercise practice in patients at risk of a recurrence of low back pain (MyBack project): a qualitative study.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to explore potential barriers and facilitators to the adoption of regular exercise practice in patients at risk of a recurrence of low back pain (LBP). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eleven patients, who recovered from a previous episode of LBP, participated in two focus groups. The semi-structured interview schedule was informed by the Behaviour Change Wheel and the Theoretical Domains Framework. Focus groups were held through videoconference, audio and video recorded and transcribed verbatim. A deductive content analysis was performed by two researchers independently. RESULTS: Eighteen barriers and 19 facilitators were identified. The most common barriers included "lack of knowledge on how to manage a recurrence of LBP," "lack of behavioural regulation strategies and having other priorities" and "lack of self-efficacy/confidence to practice exercise autonomously and deal with a new episode of LBP." "Knowledge on exercise and recurrences," "regular exercise habits," "having specific behavioural regulation strategies," "exercise practice with others," "willingness to practice exercise and considering it a priority," and "presence of positive emotions related with exercise practice" were the most common facilitators. CONCLUSIONS: These findings will inform the development of a behaviour change-informed exercise intervention to promote regular exercise practice among patients at risk of a recurrence of LBP.

Exercise interventions are the most effective strategies to reduce the risk of a recurrence of LBP, but patients do not exercise regularly.Exercise interventions targeting specific determinants of behaviour change are needed to support the adoption of this practice.The findings of this study will allow the design of a health intervention to promote the adoption of regular exercise practice for people at risk of having a recurrence of LBP.Researchers, health professionals and policymakers should promote the implementation of evidence- based and theory-driven interventions for the secondary prevention of LBP to reduce its burden on health systems.

Physiotherapists' barriers and facilitators to the implementation of a behaviour change-informed exercise intervention to promote the adoption of regular exercise practice in patients at risk of recurrence of low back pain: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Recurrences of low back pain (LBP) are frequent and associated with high levels of disability and medical costs. Regular exercise practice may be an effective strategy to prevent recurrences of LBP, however, the promotion of this behaviour by physiotherapists seems to be challenging. This study aims to explore physiotherapists' perceived barriers and facilitators to the implementation of a behaviour change-informed exercise intervention to promote the adoption of regular exercise practice by patients at risk of recurrence of low back pain. METHODS: Two focus groups with primary healthcare physiotherapists were conducted, based on a semi-structured interview schedule informed by the Behaviour Change Wheel, including the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation-Behaviour (COM-B) model and the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). All focus groups were held through videoconference, audio and video recorded and transcribed verbatim. A deductive content analysis, using a coding matrix based on the COM-B and TDF, was performed by two independent researchers. A third researcher was approached to settle disagreements. RESULTS: In total, 14 physiotherapists participated in the focus groups. The analysis revealed a total of 13 barriers (4 COM-B components and 7 TDF domains) and 23 facilitators (5 COM-B and 13 TDF) to physiotherapists' implementation of a behaviour change-informed exercise intervention. The most common barriers were the lack of skills and confidence to implement the proposed intervention. These were explained by the fact that it differs from the usual practice of most participants and requires the learning of new skills applied to their contexts. However, for those who had already implemented other similar interventions or whose rationale is aligned with the new intervention, there seemed to exist more positive determinants, such as potential benefits for physiotherapists and the profession, improvement of quality of care and willingness to change clinical practice. For others who did not previously succeed in implementing these types of interventions, more context-related barriers were mentioned, such as lack of time to implement the intervention, schedule incompatibilities and lack of material and human resources. CONCLUSIONS: This study identified modifiable barriers and facilitators to physiotherapists' implementation of a behaviour change-informed exercise intervention for patients at risk of recurrence of LBP in primary healthcare. The findings of this study will allow the systematic and theory-based development of a behaviour change-informed training programme, aimed at physiotherapists and supporting the successful implementation of the exercise intervention.

Clinical encounters may not be responding to patients' search for meaning and control over non-specific chronic low back pain - an interpretative phenomenological analysis.

PURPOSE: Considering the need to study the experiences of individuals with musculoskeletal problems in contexts that have not yet been investigated as well as the relevance of fostering a research agenda towards person-centred care, this study aimed to explore the experiences of non-specific chronic low back pain from the perspective of Portuguese individuals living with it. MATERIAL AND METHODS: An interpretative phenomenological analysis was employed to explore the experiences of eight participants, who were recruited purposefully from two primary care centres and one clinic. Semi-structured one-to-one interviews were carried out, audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. RESULTS: Three themes were generated as interrelated parts of an extended account that explored the participants' meaning making of their experience: "Non-specific chronic low back pain as a disruptive experience"; "Searching for the meaning of non-specific chronic low back pain"; and, "Clinical encounters that perpetuate the lack of understanding about non-specific chronic low back pain." CONCLUSIONS: This study offers insight into the Portuguese individuals' experiences of non-specific chronic low back pain. Particularly, it suggests that clinical encounters may not be aligned with patients' needs and expectations. These findings may help clinicians in transferring this knowledge to therapeutic approaches to individuals with similar experiences/contexts.IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONPatients with NSCLBP need to understand their pain and to retain a sense of control over their lives.Encounters with health professionals may perpetuate the lack of understanding about pain and strategies to control it, as patients consider themselves unable to have an active role in the decision-making and are disempowered to deal with their pain.Health professionals should involve patients and promote the co-construction of an explanation that integrates both health professionals' knowledge and patients' narratives.There is a need to align both the patients' and health professionals' perspectives regarding health care in order to implement patient-centred and individually tailored treatment.

Prognostic indicators for poor outcomes in low back pain patients consulted in primary care.

BACKGROUND: Non-specific low back pain (NSLBP) is the most prevalent musculoskeletal condition in western countries and is associated with persistent disability and high consumption of health care resources. NSLBP patients first seek primary health care services but the outcomes are often uncertain. This study aimed to examine the clinical course of the outcomes and to identify prognostic indicators for poor outcomes in NSLBP patients who consulted primary care. METHODS: A prospective cohort study of 115 patients seeking treatment for NSLBP in primary care was conducted. Participants were consecutively recruited by their General Practitioners (GPs) and then assessed at baseline and 2 and 6 months later. Baseline assessment included socio-demographic and clinical data, psychosocial factors, pain, disability, and health related quality of life (HRQoL). Pain, disability, HRQoL and global perception of change were also assessed at 2 and 6-months' follow-up. In addition, information regarding the GP' practice was collected. Poor outcomes were determined according to the cut-off point used to define a persistent disabling condition and the minimal important change established for disability, pain and for global perception of change. The relationship between variables on baseline and poor outcomes was modulated through binary logistic regression analysis. The significance of associations was evaluated at ≤ 0.05 p-value with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and adjusted odds ratios (AOR). RESULTS: 110 (94.8%) and 104 (89.7%) participants completed the follow-up assessment at 2 and 6 months, respectively. The mean age (±SD) was 48.06 ± 11.41, with 53.9%, (N = 62) reporting an acute presentation of NSLBP. Six months after GP consultation, 53.8% (N = 56) of the participants reported a persistent disabling condition. An "LBP episode of less than 12 weeks" [AOR: 0.26; 95% CI (0.10, 0.65); AOR: 0.34; 95% CI (0.14, 0.81); AOR: 0.21; 95% CI (0.09, 0.53)],"maladaptive psychosocial factors" [AOR: 2.06; 95% CI (1.40, 3.04); AOR: 1.82; 95% CI (1.27, 2.59); AOR: 1.72; 95% CI (1.20, 2.47)] were significantly associated with poor outcomes on disability, pain and global perception of change, respectively. Besides these factors, being employed reduces the chances of poor outcomes on disability [AOR 0.31; 95% CI (0.11, 0.92)]. CONCLUSIONS: A large proportion of LBP patients seeking primary health care reported poor outcomes 6 months after GP consultation. Patients who report chronic LBP, maladaptive psychosocial factors and are unemployed have a significant increase in the risk of poor outcome. These findings suggest the need of implementing effective models of care able to provide early screening and appropriate treatment to those at greatest risk of a poor outcome. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials NCT04046874 (August 6, 2019). Retrospectively registered.

Interdisciplinary stratified care for low back pain: A qualitative study on the acceptability, potential facilitators and barriers to implementation.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The SPLIT project aims to introduce an interdisciplinary stratified model of care for patients with low back pain. This study aimed to explore the acceptability and identify potential barriers and facilitators regarding the upcoming implementation of this project, based on the general practitioners' and physiotherapists' perceptions. METHODS: A qualitative study was carried out supported by two focus groups, which were conducted by two researchers. A focus group was carried out with each professional group. One focus group included six general practitioners and the other included six physiotherapists. The focus groups were based on a semi-structured interview schedule, audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. A thematic analysis was conducted. RESULTS: The participants explored aspects related to the acceptability of the SPLIT project, emphasising the satisfactory amount of effort that is expected to be required for its implementation. Potential facilitators to the implementation of the model were identified, such as the participants`motivation. Potential barriers were also explored, with particular emphasis on the challenges related to the change of routine care. Lastly, the need for particular adjustments in the health services was also highlighted. CONCLUSIONS: This study`s participants highlighted the feasibility and acceptability of the SPLIT project. The identification of potential barriers and facilitators to its implementation also attained major relevance to better prepare the upcoming implementation of this project. The generalizability of findings to the larger population of relevant practitioners is limited, since only two focus groups were carried out. Therefore, this study`s findings should be considered in terms of transferability to contexts that may have some similarities to the context where the study was carried out.

A narrative reasoning course to promote patient-centred practice in a physiotherapy undergraduate programme: a qualitative study of final year students.

BACKGROUND: Narrative reasoning has been presented as a core component of the health professionals' competencies. AIM OF THE STUDY: This study aimed to explore the students' perspectives about the contribution of a narrative reasoning course to promote patient-centred practice. METHODS: An interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA) was undertaken through focus groups. Eighteen volunteer final year students participated in three focus groups. Data analysis followed the IPA principles. FINDINGS: Three themes emerged: (1) "developing distinctive competencies"; (2) "shifting students' focus" and (3) "challenging students' professional identity". In the first theme, students distinguished their capability to better understand patients' experiences and needs and to be aware of the importance of a collaborative therapeutic relationship. In the second theme, students emphasized a shift from themselves as clinicians towards their patients. Finally, in the third theme participants shared the perspective that they have developed a different clinical profile, and that their reasoning and clinical actions have changed. CONCLUSIONS: Students recognized the contribution of the course in developing competencies to facilitate patient-centred practice. Future research is needed to inform lecturers on how to best integrate narrative reasoning within the physiotherapy undergraduate curricula.

Arts, literature and reflective writing as educational strategies to promote narrative reasoning capabilities among physiotherapy students.

BACKGROUND: The use of arts, literature and reflective writing has becoming increasingly popular in health professionals education. However, research examining its contribution as an educational strategy to promote narrative reasoning capabilities is limited, particularly from the students' perspective. AIM OF THE STUDY: This study aimed to explore the final year physiotherapy students' perspectives about the contribution of arts, literature and reflective writing in facilitating narrative reasoning capabilities. METHODS: Three focus group meetings using a semi-structured interview schedule were carried out to collect data. Focus group sessions were audiotaped and transcribed verbatim. Interpretative phenomenological analysis was used to conduct the study and analyze the transcripts. FINDINGS: Three themes emerged: (1) developmental understanding of the patients' experiences; (2) developmental understanding about the self; and (3) embedding reflection in clinical practice. Students emphasized an increasing capability to be sensitive and vicariously experience the patient's experience. Through reflective writing, students reported they became more capable of thinking critically about their practice and learning needs for continuous professional development. Finally, students highlighted the contribution of these strategies in making reflection part of their practice. CONCLUSIONS: Final year physiotherapy students reported enhanced skills of narrative reasoning. The findings support the inclusion of these strategies within the undergraduate physiotherapy curricula.